Fine’s cases to be spread among colleagues, visiting judges

Bill Gang

Tuesday, Oct. 20, 1998 | 10:50 a.m.

The court cases assigned to deposed Family Judge Fran Fine will be split among visiting judges and Fine's fellow judges at Family Court in an effort to minimize the impact her removal from office will have on litigants.

Meanwhile, Fine's attorney, William Terry, said an appeal is being prepared to let Fine keep her black robe and gavel and remain a legal candidate for re-election in the General Election.

Fine, in fact, is still a judge until the state Commission on Judicial Discipline files its decision with the Nevada Supreme Court, a formality expected later this week. But even then, the disciplinary action will not take effect for 15 days.

For now, Terry said, Fine is still campaigning for re-election anticipating that the appeal to the high court will result in a stay order putting the controversial case on hold until an ultimate resolution.

However, Fine voluntarily will not sit as a judge, decide cases or collect a salary until an ultimate resolution of the case by the high court, a federal court or voters, Terry said.

That resulted in the announcement late Friday by Presiding Family Judge Gloria Sanchez of the plan to deal with Fine's caseload.

The disciplinary commission had ruled that Fine had violated ethical rules prohibiting judges from having conversations with only one side in a case and then acting on it. Fine also was found to have appointed her cousin as a mediator in a case without revealing the relationship.

One concern for the court system was what to do about Fine's cases where lawyers already had argued the issues but no decision was handed down.

Sanchez said those cases will be randomly reassigned to other Family Court judges "for review, settlement and signing of an order as is appropriate."

"Court calendars are set to proceed as scheduled to minimize disruptions and delays in cases affecting families and children," Sanchez added.

Terry said there are several issues he will challenge in the appeal that likely will take months to resolve.

However, those issues and the appeal itself will simply fall by the wayside if Fine is beaten in the election by challenger Robert Lueck, a private attorney who finished second to the incumbent in the primary election.

Because the commission's decision came so close to the general election, there was no way to remove her name from ballot. In fact, early voting started in Nevada on Saturday, and mail-in ballots for some areas have been sent out and some already had been returned.

Terry said he expects the state Supreme Court will grant a stay in the case because of the potential complications that could result if it doesn't and Fine wins the election despite not being a valid candidate.

He explained that if her disciplinary case were later reversed, there would be a question about who would be the rightful judge, opening the door to more litigation.

In the appeal, Terry said he will challenge:

-- The fairness of the commission's decision to remove Fine from the bench in 1998 based on allegations from cases in 1993 and 1996 is fair.

-- The propriety of the commission sitting first to determine if there is probable cause to have a public disciplinary hearing and then sitting in judgment in the same case.

-- His allegation that Fine was disciplined for acts that were not part of the original complaint, but based on evidence that turned up at the hearings.

-- The constitutionality of the legislative statute prohibiting a judge removed from office from ever sitting again as a judge. He said it is a separation-of-powers issue for the Nevada Supreme Court.

-- The constitutionality of the commission's power to remove from office a judge elected by the voters. This would be a federal court issue suggesting that the only legal removal of an elected official is through a recall election by the voters, Terry said.